Slashdot Mirror

Get yourself a 50 cal or a tank, stay on the roads and go have fun with uber.

I'm getting so tired of typing this... taxi regulations are there to reduce the amount of cars on the road and to keep the industry safe. Taxi's are also forced to be a part of a city's overall transportation solution; they have to be in certain places, can't ignore fares, and have to provide services for the disabled. There is no researching this, it is a fact.

I would also think that taking a person's fingerprints and giving them a documented connection to the company they are driving for would dissuade them from committing further crimes. Even though they're obviously in need of improvement, background checks work for guns:

http://smartgunlaws.org/effect...
"Research has found that states with more expansive background check laws experience 48 percent less gun trafficking, 38 percent fewer deaths of women shot by intimate partners, and 17 percent fewer firearms involved in aggravated assaults."

Really it's pretty asinine to make the case that people who are completely anonymous would be as safe over a general population of people as people who are known. Look at how different people are on the internet under an alias versus in real life.

You might be surprised, but there are far less restrictions on children owning guns than you would expect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://smartgunlaws.org/minimu...

Buying guns can happen at 16 in Vermont, and some states don't appear to even have minimum age laws.

This is already the law. Private ownership of automatic weapons is very limited.

The National Firearms Act of 1934: The National Firearms Act of 1934 (“NFA”) imposes a tax on the making and transfer of machine guns and certain other weapons, as well as a special occupational tax on persons and entities engaged in the business of importing, manufacturing and dealing in those weapons. (The NFA distinguishes between “making” a weapon, and “manufacturing” a weapon. Only a registered NFA manufacturer can “manufacture” a machine gun; other persons who construct machine guns are “making” them, according to the NFA.2 ) As detailed below, the law also requires the registration of all machine guns.
While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the underlying purpose of the law was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in machine guns and certain other weapons.3 Congress found these firearms pose a significant crime problem because of their frequent use in crime, and the $200 making and transfer taxes were considered quite severe at the time and adequate to discourage or eliminate transfers in these firearms.4 The $200 tax has not changed since 1934.

As described below, in 1986, Congress enacted a much stricter law, banning the possession and transfer of all machine guns except machine guns manufactured prior to May 19, 1986, and machine guns possessed by or manufactured for governmental entities.

Registration of machine guns: The NFA requires anyone manufacturing, making, importing, or transferring a machine gun (or certain other weapons also regulated by the NFA) to register it with the Secretary of the Treasury.5 The NFA requires the Secretary to maintain a central registry of all of these weapons that are “not in the possession or under the control of the United States,” i.e., machine guns owned by state or local entities, as well as those legally owned by private persons, are included in the registry.6

http://smartgunlaws.org/federa...

Very few people have been killed by legally owned (civilian-owned) automatic weapons in the last 50 years or so.

Why are they hard to legally get?

Like I said, you have opinions on things you don't know anything about...

http://smartgunlaws.org/new-yo...

New York does not impose a waiting period prior to the purchase of a firearm (although it may take up to six months to obtain a license to purchase a handgun).

I don't know about you, but "up to six months obtain a license" strikes me as a hell of a waiting period.

The above are STATE laws, try it in New York City itself and it is much worse...

You are the one who is seriously misinformed:

https://www.faa.gov/news/press... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

As it currently is you need to register to own a hobby drone, but not to own a gun.

You can buy a drone with cash, anywhere, no questions asked. You cannot buy a gun without 2 forms of identification, a federal background check, and possibly a wait a few days for the background check to clear. Lots of people cannot buy the gun at all and will be arrested for trying. MANY states ALSO require you to have a license before you can buy a gun - for instance, in you need a license first to buy a gun.

Maybe you are trolling, or stupid. But now you are at least a little more informed.

The legal ownership of fully automatic weapons in the US is already severely limited. Every legal owner of such a weapon is under federal oversight. http://smartgunlaws.org/federal-law-on-machine-guns-automatic-firearms/

One reason that terrorism is a special concern is that it has the obvious potential to expand without warning. People who live in bad neighborhoods, live with an abusive spouse, or are drug gang members have some level of understanding of the risk involved. They've been warned. The same is not true of most people who are part of a crowd of 50,000 people at a ball game.

All brand new fire arm purchases come with a lock that makes it impossible to load the weapon without bypassing the lock.

It's been a few years since I bought a new firearm. When did that happen?

It was ten years ago; here's a cite.

According to this website: http://smartgunlaws.org/minimu... the federal minimum age for possession of a handgun is 18. But according to that same website, the minimum age set by Connecticut state law is 21.

Per capita. It's from this report.

Well that sounds like a problem with people not properly securing their guns. Put severe negligence laws on the books (which many states don't have - http://smartgunlaws.org/child-...) and enforce the penalties when they happen and I imagine that the numbers will significantly drop.

Are there cheap, shitty safes that kids can get in? Yes. So let's certify them to some standard and go from there.

Chief among those worries: the safety mechanism will fail when it's needed most. If you're relying on a weapon for defense, the last thing you want is another avenue for failure

Fail when it's needed most? Isn't the *actual safety mechanism* needed the most when a child has the gun (300 people in the US shot and killed by children under 6), or another family member pulls the trigger on someone in an angry rage, or even themselves (guns kept in a home increase the suicide rate for all family members and 75% of teenage gun suicides are with other's weapons stored in family homes).

How many of these preventable deaths stopped per one person whose smart gun doesn't fire in self defence makes it worthwhile?

You could even say the same thing about keeping a gun unloaded and locked in a safe, what's the point of doing that if your gun isn't going to be under your pillow "when you need it the most" ?

source for gun statistics

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/

31,076 gun deaths in 2012. that's 85 per day.

I am a Denver resident. I've seen my last three movies at that very theater. This act has chilled us all to the bone. It's like Columbine, but without any parents to blame. The suspect was a post-grad working on his doctorate; in fact, he was in the process of dropping out.

TP quotes one news article, but that news correspondent made an incorrect assumption. Those doors are steel construction with 1/4" thick bang-plates; you can't simply kick them in.

The gunman did not "sneak in"... he sneaked out after buying a ticket! His white car was parked strategically by those exit doors at the back of the building. He propped those doors open on his way out and geared-up for a few minutes before going back in through the same door. He basically used the same loophole that employees use to get high during a shift. (Plz... that's not a generalization; I'm sure most cinema-trons are hard working and honest.)

So, for anyone that's going to say that theater rules or municipal code would have prevented it, you're full of it. This may have been prevented with better building security at the exits, more attentive staff (or just more staff for an important midnight event) or even a person that notices this douchebag propping open a one-way exit and just closes the door behind him. At least then, the gunman would have had to walk around the building or drive his car fully-armed and quite obvious. The police response that night was so quick because they were already at the mall to help direct the increased traffic. If his route back into the theater was blocked, he wouldn't have had the opportunity to stun with gas or have his "fish in a barrel" target range. Sure, it wouldn't have stopped him from making trouble, but it very well could have prevented a massacre of this scale.

One thing has been made very clear; there is no legislation or body of intelligence that prevented James Holmes from owning, loading and carrying a devastating firearm into a crowded theater. Up until he started shooting people, James Holmes did everything by the book. That's the scariest part of all. How many states ban assault weapons? Care to guess? Just five. How many limit or regulate the sale of assault weapons? Three. What does that leave us, Mr. Wizard? That leaves us with forty-two states that don't do anything about the sale of assault weapons.

You guessed it. Colorado is one of those forty-two states.

A massacre has never happened simply because we were missing a specific law. An armed victim is still a victim. A massacre cannot be prevented by passive technological security measures or even active security screening, for those are simply patterns and obstacles to a persistent attacker.

A massacre happens because the attacker knows that people just don't give a damn.